Added: 4 years ago
From: amadeusk331
Views: 143,491
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (282)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • @ elevation, its seen how the cloud of electron move in WAVE... up and down.. up and down, while SPINNING. " Whenever we look at 2d, think of 3d "

  • Amazing - I am wondering how Heisenberg, Bohr and all the others would react ;-)

    Ok, so we know where it is - well, sort of - but we still don't have any idea where

    it's going ...

  • coooooooooooooooooooool

  • I may be way off.

  • It seems to me that since mass is the gathering of compressed matter, and matter is the formation of huge amounts of energy, the gravitational field is a product of that energy. It also appears to me that Gravity is a product of magnetism, hence why gravity can bend light, it is an interacting magnetic field.

  • @KashbyKorb gravity bends space not light duh

    light travels through space

  • @KashbyKorb ~~ Exactly. Read Ed Leedskalnins Pamplets from Coral Castle in Homestead, Miami, Florida.

  • @KashbyKorb ~~There is not such thing as an electron. That is a magnet. And no you are not way off. You do not have to have a degree to be an observer. A lot of people with degrees have been taught wrong information. And that information gets passed down to create more misguided information. We need a revolutionary scientist for our generation. We need another Tesla.

  • @Itisallgoingtoend " such a thing"

  • @Itisallgoingtoend no such thing as an electron?  Did you have a different name for it?

  • @Itisallgoingtoend shut up you fool ask the bunny rabbit thats workin the controls in your head if theres any such thing as an electron.he knows where it is

  • LOL I'm laughing at all the crackpots with their own "theories" here that think YouTube is some kind of scientific peer review BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  • @SidewaysQuark more like unsubstantiated hypotheses...

  • @CornDoctor hence "theories" in "sarcasm quotes" :-)

  • I Love The Video It Can Increase My Knowledge Scientists in Sweden film moving electron for the first time

  • Good, I like that you share this video, I wish success always Scientists in Sweden film the sub-atomic particle, the electron, for the first time

  • Nice Video That You Share , So Very Nice Thanks You An electron is approximately 1867 times smaller than a proton and is constantly moving.

  • I Really Like The Video From Your Scientists in Sweden film moving electron for the first time

  • Your Video Is Very Useful Sharing Scientists in Sweden film the sub-atomic particle, the electron, for the first time.

  • ricktbdgc don't be stupid, there is no such thing as nothingness, the human mind can not imagine nothingness, think about it, you're just talking about blackness.

  • Now imagine a creature whose eyes aren't stimulated by photons, but by other particles. I wonder what the universe would like to it.

  • alan boyle sounds like he's about to commit scuicide

  • all you can see in this video is interference pattern waves! what is the Luminiferous Aether? I will never tell, lol.

  • Jorng des ver der 1s2 horng der flip flip flip flip een der stroobicoopie.

  • Wait, the electrons are floating on protons? What!?

  • @ObiTrev As a light wave passes by, the electric field flips at the frequency of the wave, causing the electron to be moved up and down like a cork on a wavy lake surface at that frequency.

  • @EntropicPrinciple Well why did they have to make it sound all fancy? "Electrons float on protons like ducks in a pond", paraphrasing of course.

  • It looks like a; Spherical Standing Wave Structure !!!

  • Even nothingness is something though. Look it up if you don't believe me

  • nothiness is a quality in which time and space can exist even if nothing is in it. So space ie nothing is actually something ie with a quality or qualities even if it is not a thing. The transverse relationship across this space is what appears to be energy this energy then seems to have location the location of this energy is what we call an atom or atoms or qbjects or things.the interaction of theese apparent locations are what we call energy. consciousness=space=time=locat­ion=energy=you

  • @bryncomeaux because you are a scientist and you can prove it -_-

  • I thought due to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle that this was not possible? Don't kill me if I am wrong because I am only sixteen and there is still much I am to learn about particle physics and physics in general

  • @fAllenTengu2 The fact that you're 16 are know this much about physics already gives me hope for our next generation.

  • @fAllenTengu2 The Uncertainty Principle only states that the electron cannot simultaneously have a very precise position and momentum. If you saw a point and the electron was perfectly stationary, I'd call shenanigans. But, there's no reason you can't have a blurry position and uncertain speed, as in this video.

  • @fAllenTengu2 at the end he says that the video was slowed down and looped, maybe they got lucky?

  • But i believe in a dinosaur riding mountain dew drinking jesus

  • Exciting. But where is the electron? Is it the whole blue thing? Is it surrounding valence shells in small blue pixels around the shells I see? Some please elaborate.

  • If you can see them, you can't know how fast they're moving. But if you already know how fast they're moving, you won't be able to see where they are.

    Uncertainty is the excuse I give my girlfriend for missing the bowl in the middle of the night.

  • Needs arrows, labels, and 3D.

  • Btw how do they know its an electron, not a squirgazalalalalatron?

  • Gravity always brings me down...

  • Spectacular :d

  • uh ohh im in that interesting side of youtube again... looks like ima be up all night. lolz

  • have you ever wondered what makes you you, or how the old greeks knew most of their knowledge, or perhaps what makes us want to understand what is reality no matter where it ends.On my perspective of view is all an illusion and as an illusion has to be treated. Atoms are not really touching each other. Also theres no really empty space, like water air and even in a vacum, theres something in the vacum otherwise you would be looking at nothingness and nothiness is now impossible.

  • Continued from below: well the more particles there are with force, (perhaps by their still existent wave functions whether we "see" them or not) the greater said matter/object attraction power they will have as a group. A planet is a pretty massive collection of particles, all which together may have a greater force of attraction, what we'd call gravity! Maybe i'm wrong, but I haven't come across anything yet to prove this wrong, it is afterall, a thought!

  • @inscizor Just saying you don't need to study Quantum Physics to come to that conclusion. Regular chemistry (Intermolecular Forces) will suffice.

  • Back in school, some 15 years ago, we were told that gravity is the result of the spin of the planet. Years later now, that i've been researching quantum physics, I' have my own theory as to what causes gravity. We know that the more atoms-molecules bond together, to in effect create "matter", as the matter becomes larger or more volume to it, it's apparent mass seems to increase as a result. However, I would stand to think that each particle in said matter still has an attracting force about it

  • Comment removed

  • This....is fecking fascinating :D Who cannot love our amazing universe after seeing stuff like this? :D

  • Wow, this is exactly how I imagined it! I must be onto something BIG!

  • FAKE ! cuz it's too imposible to see the electron

  • For a real picture of an Electron, check out mid 1980's magazine adverts by Acorn Computers

  • Obviously the electron is standing wave structure thats spatially extended, thats why we can see it.

  • Fake ! Fake ! Fake ! One is more likely to take a picture of a bullet fired out of a gun on it's way to a target... then an electron, a high speed particle, with the highest speed camera in the Universe. Come on people !!! Got to go now... having lunch with Santa Claus.

  • @Redshift313 "then an electron, a high speed particle"

    Since when was an electron a high speed particle? It can go any speed between not moving and the speed of light. The electrons in a wire travel around 90meters in total a day.

  • @9hello123 I was referring to the momentum of an Electron in it's positions around a Nucleus... NOT from point "A" to point "B".

  • @Redshift313 Well then that is completely irrelevant as it is not an electron around a nucleus and even if it was, that is entirely incorrect. An electron does not just take positions around a nucleus and orbit it. An electron has multiple momentums, positions and energies all at once, while staying completely still and moving at the same time. Most of the time the range of momentums it will take will all correspond to very slow velocities.

  • It is impossible to take a picture of an electron. 

  • @XYZAerial well they took it :) deal with it apocalypse is comming

  • Comment removed

  • @ricktbdgc or not see.

  • @ricktbdgc Photons are nonexistent. They are simply a solitonic after-effect of electron interactions. Electrons, while existent, are not point particles; they are waves in the "Luminiferous Aether" -- a theory that Kelvin, Tesla, Lorentz, and Einstein all subscribed to at some level.  Check out this website for more info and rigorous mathematical proofs glafreniere . com/matter.htm

  • @callif I watched the video made by a guy named artynz, called the wave structure of matter. I fully believe this theroy to be true, and I dont believe electrons are a point particle as told by the standard model. I agree with you that they are waves. I dont belive this video to be true

  • @ricktbdgc I'm sorry. Did you just say electrons are non-existent?

  • @deathscreton i dunno

  • @ricktbdgc untrue.

  • @ricktbdgc electrons only exist in mathematical formulas? what about all electricity then?

  • @ricktbdgc I shall tell my crackly standing up hair that whats making it stand only exists in a formula :P That should make it all come down.

  • @shkotay hahahaha im top comment.. i just meant that on the small scale theres nothing to see, if light itself is a particle independant of other particles then if you zoom way in you'll see nothing just feel the forces of nearby charges and stuff, and the charge itself is more like a cloud or a field similar to the magnetic field surrounding a magnet, so how can you even think of an electron as a particle, or a point in space like a spec of dust, it is there but different to think about dunno

  • @shkotay energy is defiantely there, but its like particles dont exist but somehow they do when you look at an apple i cant explain, blows my mind

  • @ricktbdgc Yah, in QM common sense and common logic does not apply, and amazingly, QM is the right way the universe works by lmao! Isnt it crazy? Its a wave...and a prticle, but if you shoot one particle at 2 slits in a screen, it goes through both at once, yet if you observr it, it only goes through one. And...well my head hurts lol :D You also sound like you are talking about Faraday force fields :D He was a hell of a guy.

  • @ricktbdgc  Did you happen to notice the video at the top of this page?

  • @ricktbdgc What are you talking about lol. You know you just said you cant see electrons on a video SHOWING an actual electron? Lol

  • You can't take a picture of an electron. Light is too big.

  • @EternityGuitarist

    glad to know somone has survived a galaxy collision. how was it?

    you should practice speaking without certainties

  • how can they film "an" electron moving when their its location can only be uncertain?

  • @Feuerader they have been able to film an electron but not a proton or neutron. The video doesnt make sence . The probability of finding a proton should be greater since the proton will be very massive on this scale.

  • @RobertsDigital Charge to mass ratio is prohibitive

  • @Feuerader and they don't reflect light....

  • @MrSF0011: Dude... no. Just... no...

  • @MrSF0011

    What...?!! "galaxies,planets,humans,anima­ls,insects,atoms etc they all behave in a similar way"

    WHAT111!!!??

    Two planets come together, have sex, one gets pregnant, delivers a baby planet..............

    When a human nears the end of it's life, it explodes with such force and light that it can been seen through the Universe, and the core collapses into a black hole...............

    You mean something like that?

  • is this an electron or an potential / possible state of electrons?

  • @MrSF0011 Atoms are matter. They are made up of smaller parts of matter called quarks (particles), that are held together by the nuclear forces. Atoms then can bond together to form molecules, generally via the electromagnetic force. Electrons attract protons and vice versa, so molecules (structures made up of atoms) are structures held together by those attractive forces. Imagine 2 protons being attracted by a mutual electron somewhere in between them.

  • @MrSF0011 The electron doesn't have an "orbit". The people who say that are either not scientists, or are dumbing it down tramendously. It was long thought that electrons orbit or vibrate, but this would defy the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. You cannot know a particles location and momentum at the same time, there is always an error margin. If you could calculate the orbit you would know both. That and acceleration would cause them to radiate, lose energy and fall into the nucleus.

  • No thanks, MSNBC

  • The strong force acts between quarks, which make up the baryons (particles like protons and neutrons). It has a range of about 10^-15 meters. And the gauge boson for this force is the gluon. Just some on this force.

  • @MrSF0011 Well, the solar system works with the gravitational force which has infinite range. Atoms and their particles interact with the strong force, it's what keeps them (the particles) together. The strong force is extremely strong but has a very very small range, confined to the inside of an atomic nucleus. An electron does not orbit the nucleus because of its interaction with gravity but it does so through the electromagnetic force.

  • can someone explain to me what the parts of the picture represent???

    Is the dark center the nucleus?

    Are the rings electron waves orbiting the atom??

    What is going on :S??

  • zer: But that's how it always happen :)

  • @MrSF0011

    Here is a erazy thing the behavior of electrons affect what color you see from everything and certain elements are tied in to certain colors. Thats how they know what elements are in stars with out visiting them. it explains why water is stickey and why metal can conduct electricty. Also explains why semiconductors work the way they do.

    also electricity is just many electrons in a group and the smallest electrical charge that can be had is one electron

  • @MrSF0011 its just the way its drawn but any college level chemisty teacher will tell you the same the definition of the atom has been changed for some time they just dont teach it in elementary school becuase its difficult to understand

  • @MrSF0011

    Just similar gravity force is way weaker than electromagitisim force also electrons inhabit a cloud region and does not orbit

  • It looks like a pixel

  • @MrSF0011 Sometimes i think that if we are able to zoom things to their smallest possible sizes we may end up seeing the earth again --- we will be going in circles

  • i see no movement here

  • @metalcoreelectric its cleary moving up and down

  • What's with all this nonsense about Einstein? He was an atomic, not a quantum physicist- he hated quantum physics, in fact, and didn't understand the workings of quantum physics or the atomic bomb. His theory of gravity is incomplete. In fact, the numbers didn't gibe until it was demonstrated that gravity belongs to the 11th dimension. The space-time model is outdated, and was a 19th century mind's attempt at a Grand Unified Theory. Things have progressed since then.

  • @gsmonks

    "What's with all this nonsense about Einstein? He was an atomic, not a quantum physicist"

    Still, he is the one who explained the photoelectric effect.

  • Watch the video portrait of Anne L'Huilier. You will learn more about her, about her research and amazing discovery.

    She is one of the 2011 Laureate L'Oréal-UNESCO For Women in Science in Physical Sciences.

  • The Swedish scientist who created the fattest camera is one of the 2011 Lauréate L'Oréal-UNESCO For Women in Science Awards in Physical Sciences.

    Watch her amazing video portrait and discover who Pr. Anne L'Huilier @forwomeninscience YouTube Channel

  • @forwomeninscience not clear. where is the link to see he amazing video portrait please?

  • The explanation of gravity isn't satisfying to me.

  • @09daniscool

    WTF are you babbling about!?!

  • @09daniscool Agreed. I remember when I was 17 there was a night I couldn't get any sleep because I couldn't stop thinking about what was holding my bed to the floor, me to the bed, and my blanket to me. And general relativity just couldn't explain it all. What is the mechanism for the bending of space-time with which mass distorts it?!?!!? GRRR!

  • @jasonguyperson

    spin and magnetism

  • @09daniscool I have a feeling that if we ever understood that... a LOT more would be understood

  • Comment removed

  • Aaargh, explain what we're seeing.

  • @UnderManiac An electron isn't just a particle, its a wave, so what your seeing is the electron acting as a wave even though it acts just like a particle.

  • @steeveyneon Yeah, that's why it's confusing. I can get that it's a wave, or I can get it's a particle, but my mind is confused, at this time, that it is both a wave and a particle at the same time, depending if you're measuring it or not. I am trying to resolve this idea so it makes sense to me, but I'm having trouble piecing the two as one. Just like the duality of a photon. I am sure it can't be both. I'm even trying to consider it as a discrete vibrating energy field.

  • @UnderManiac

    read walter russell's work

  • @UnderManiac

    Electrons have the same mass no matter what their orbit.

    Electrons generate light/ EM radiation photons.

    It is light/ EM which is not a wave - it is an outpouring of weightless spinning photon energy packets - a stream of distinct photons having energy related to frequency of emission, and equivalent mass =e/c^2.

    Is this then not an image of spinning photons being deflected be an electron ?

  • @z1zaz I've read that scientists have, using nano technology, gotten atoms to spell words or numbers. These words or numbers remain how they arranged them for some time. This would suggest that atoms and electrons do not have wave functions that collapse when observed, or the information would disappear.

    I know what an electron is. Electrons absorb energy and enter into a higher orbit, when releasing that energy (a photon of energy, or light), they return to the lowest orbit possible.

  • @z1zaz I'm trying to wrap my mind around quantum theory, string theory, and m theory. It's not making proper sense, they say an electron exists both as a wave and as a particle. This can't be. I'm trying to resolve the double split experiment. I know there is an explanation that does not require photons to be discrete particles in one instance and waves in another. There is another explanation, I know it. I just have to continue working it out in my mind and on paper.

  • @z1zaz I can't accept 11 dimensions and infinite universes. It's all too messy. There is a better theory out there. It may be the best theory yet, but it just doesn't seem to fit. Where's Einstein to work this stuff out? Clone him. There still are slices of his brain available to extract dna. He'll resolve this conundrum. Scientists argue about these theories. Nobody seems to have the answers.

  • @UnderManiac

    A good brandy does me.

    If it ain't simple - it ain't right !

  • @z1zaz mmmm, brandy.

    Einstein said it himself, that the universe is easy to understand, we just have figure it out.

    He rejected theories that became too complex or were messy as quantum theory is.

    It's all understandable, but we need the right people to figure it out because it has to be simpler than what they're saying. It shouldn't be this complex, and I understand quantum physics.

  • @z1zaz Gravity is not a particle. As Einstein theorized, and was proven right on several occasions and still is right, it's the bending of space-time by a mass. Orbits are objects following the curves of space-time. We orbit the sun because we are caught in it's gravity well, not because it's got us caught by some unseen string. The moon orbits the earth because it's caught in earth's gravity well. The moon is moving away slowly, possibly due to the sun's gravity well's influence.

  • @UnderManiac

    Of course gravity is not a particle.

    Change gravity and everything else changes, including 'c' in e=mc^2.

    This being why anti-grav craft can turn so sharply at high speed.

    Could the moon be gaining weight more quickly than the Earth is due to our magnetosphere?

  • @UnderManiac Check out the YouTube channel, 'bgaede' — the guy has some interesting and "simpler" explanations. I'm not saying he's right, but he provides (IMHO) some possible *physical* mechanisms for gravity, light, the atom, etc.

  • @lukeev

    "'bgaede' — the guy has some interesting and "simpler" explanations."

    Yes, they may be simpler, but they are wrong. The guy doesn't even know the first thing about the scientific theories he's criticizing.

  • @MomoTheBellyDancer Well you've convinced me! :D

  • Lots of scientists talk absolute guff and get lots of stuff wrong, so don't make it sound like a masonic club where "scientists" are always right. There is no such thing as a separation between science and psuedo science except a put down by people wh think they are infallible.

    New Scientist has a narrow editorial agenda since it largely supports the thermo dynamic and gravitational view of nature and outmoded parameters of method. There is too much faith in maths models too.

  • Comment removed

  • If this is really an electron than it looks much like a standing wave. If its a standing wave than it continously needs energy from the surounding medium. I think that Nikola Tesla used to say that all matter are created from the Aether in motion....once the motion stops, "matter" returns to the primordial Aether...

  • THIS IS FAKE. Nice try, though. If you try to bounce something off an electron, probably EM radtiation (which is necessary to detect where it is), you are going to cause the electron to recoil significantly from its initial position. What else are you planning on bouncing off of it? Other electrons? Neutrinos? This is 100% bogus. These guys would have won the Nobel Prize.

  • Comment removed

  • im not the best at science but is this fake, i fink hes making a joke, he says stroboscope and that looks like the light from a strobe light if that makes sense, i may be wrong like.

  • Video is fake, no one can locate a electron. Even if this was, it looks like ripples on the surface of the ocean, wave particle?

  • Actually this is true. This is many images of the electron put together...Look at this article: focus. aps. org/ story/v21/st7

  • It's only perception. Viewing something is not the same as looking at its reflection; Over half of our bodies are not viewable to us; We use mirrors to enhance our vision. It's not about science, the controversy relates to semantics. Watching the Cowboys on t.v. isn't the same as going to the game itself. Technology allows us to capture images from light, not its substance (heat); The claims in this video are false because the video shows a series of images claiming it to be substantive.

  • That is FALSE, my teacher says that this video is a FAKE, because electrons cannot be seen. This is explained by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. If you send light to an atom to observe, you alter the atom and you can never know where the electrons.

    These images are waves of water illuminated by a blue light

    PD: sorry for my fucking english, I used a google traductor XD

  • @soWHATimUGLY Right, but that's beside the point. They still knew enough to be experts. Many scientists are like this: they profess proven theories/facts, but will also hypothesize about things they don't understand and prove/disprove them in order to gain new insight. Yes, Planck wasn't an expert and still shook the world. You do have a point there, but he was still trying to answer questions that many people couldn't answer, which is essentially what good scientists do.

  • There is no problem with Science , the problem is Capitalism , a Market system of ARTIFICIAL SCARCITY TO PERPETUATE POVERTY AND EXPLOITATION in the interest of the Owning/Ruling elite. Science/technology is another means currently to maximise profit taking , it has been emasculated by the needs of CAPITAL . When we share the Earth for our common needs and well being SCIENCE WILL BE LIBERATED and technology shall be used for a world of plenty in harmony , within and without.

  • @arzoyan If there were no "artificial scarcity" then everything would exist in unlimited quantities. Where would it all fit? Without capital, we would be before the Stone Age.

    Are you a disciple of Fourier, who predicted that the seas would turn to lemonade?

    I think you should look at fractional reserve banking first and then consider the problem of economic calculation without prices.

  • @E You should read it as" Market system of artificial scarcity ",the demand and supply in a anarchic capitalist production causes excess capacity and over-production for Market but human needs are always NOT TAKE CARE OF AS PRIMARY OBJECTIVE. Science and technology have made scarcity artificial in fthe context of Capitalist production.

  • Forgive me for sounding ignorant here, but I was hoping someone could help me out a bit: what is the lightwave in this image, and what is the electron? Is that black bit in the centre a nucleus, or what?

  • @Nurdapurda ignorant, on the contrary, im stumped too! is the wave the light wave or electron probability cloud, or is the black bit the electron cloud

  • @heffenuts The doble slit experiment is academic sophistry. Electrons are not balls being fired from an electron gun as is claimed in this mind control garbage experiment, they are expanding EM vortices. The electron of the periodical table is an entirely different creature than the electrons man makes. One is theroretical mythematical fiction and the other is real. If you believe they are the same you are absolutely lost. See: "The Case Against the Nuclear Atom", by DB Larson!

  • i have three words

    ELECTRON DISTRIBUTION DIAGRAM

    this does not equal a picture of an electron, c'mon, as RWJ would say, this is fake & gay, not to mention misleading

  • Does this support the Double Slit Experiments findings that electrons are actually waves? It looks like a wave from this angle, but are those ripples just observed effects of the electron which is at the center?

  • Its at all locations at all times in almost infinitely small time frames in all directions? Is it a disk? Or does it look more like an orb? What does it look like from every angle?

  • come on guys its the momentum distribution and not the position....nevertheless hats off to the guy/s who did the experiment.... its a damn tough expt...details of the expt are found in PRL

  • cool

  • cool

  • It is possible that this is NOT actually a electron moving, It is possible that this is a still, 3D image of either an electron or electron function with the property of a Vortex and that the reason why it appears to be moving is because the camera is being shifted

  • Looks like a standing wave to me.

  • This does not contradict Heisenberg's theory so stop saying that.

  • @nukeromania who ever said that just doesn't know the theory very well.

  • Its amazing they can do this!!

  • I've heard it's impossible, turns around it iS possible ^^ so cool!

  • It is impossible to know both exactly where it is and how fast it is moving at the same time, but this is, as you can see, quite possible.

  • yes, it's awesome! ^^

  • The problem with 'standing waves' is that it's not really in agreement with Quantum Mechanics. Also, a standing wave would need 'something' to keep it as such. Unless you suggest there's an Aether medium (which was irrelevant after Relativity) or a secondary wave of reverse polarity Magnetism - I don't know how this would work.

    It still would explain the propagation of charge in any way I could think of.

    An electron, as far as we know is not really a wave or particle, but can appear as both

  • Comment removed

  • Does it look the same from all angles? Is it a disc wave shape or 360 wave shape?

  • Good question!

  • I think it looks the same from all angels, but I can't be sure

  • Lol i just happend to be a SweDisH dude :)

  • I agree, standing wave. But standing wave of what? Here's my two cents: electrons are standing waves of magnetic energy that can be modeled as spinning magnetic fields. The spinning flux density B creates the electric field E pointing at the electron by E = B x V.

  • There has been entirely too much information and research done on the matter for over 100 years for a random somebody to figure it all out with his two cents, undoing over 100 years of work.

  • @zer0dahero By your statement, you are not opened minded. Your paradigm

    requires credentials and rituals, that don't reflect reality or truth.

    You have a 'union member' mind.

  • This is proof matter is made of standing waves.